Peg's Recent Blog Posts

Do we have a pipeline problem?

Submitted by Peg

After I posted yesterday about the NAWL survey, I couldn't sleep. Despite what I suggested in my original post, I am concerned about the findings, actually deeply concerned (well, except about the rainmaking finding).

That concern leads me to this question: Do we have a pipeline problem?

One of the main premises upon which the NAWL report is based is that for more than two decades women have graduated from law schools and started careers in private practice at about the same rate as men. Yet, we still haven't achieved anywhere close to parity with men at the tops of private practice, not by any measure including promotion, pay, leadership and business development.

I wonder if it isn't time to question the idea that we don't have a pipeline problem. We know that 48% of first and second year associates are women in the typical firm. However, what we don't know is what, if any, disparity there is among the career goals of those women and the men that work along side them. What percentage of those female first years have no intention of making partner at their firm or at any firm? What percentage of those female first years were hired by the firm with no intention of ever making them partners? What is the disparity between those numbers and the same numbers for the male first years? Depending on the answers to those questions, we may find that, in fact, women are starting off at much lower numbers of potential-partners from the get go.

Why, you may ask, would I speculate that the numbers may be different for males and females starting off in law firms?

NAWL’s National Survey on Retention and Promotion of Women in Law Firms

Submitted by Peg

Every year, I write a blog post on Ms. JD about NAWL's Annual Survey on the Retention and Promotion of Women in Law Firms. So, 2009 is no different. However, my enthusiasm for the topic is different this year.

The report is available here.

This year I guess I just don't have much to say. Sure the numbers are just about the same as last year. Women make up less than 16% of equity partners in the country's largest law firms. Women partners make less than their male counterparts (this year it is $66K less, on average). However, this year most of the press has been about the finding that "almost half of the firms -- 46% -- count no women in their top 10 rainmakers." As for this particular statistic, I'm just not surprised. As irrational as it may seem I still can't believe that less than 16% of equity partners are women. I can't understand why women aren't managing partners. But... for some reason I am not at all surprised that they aren't the top rainmakers. I understand that this is irrational but let me explain.

I am a mid-level associate in the corporate department of a big law firm. I have always aimed (an expected) to make partner. I even aspire to be a department head and/or a partner-in-charge of my office. Hell, I would even hope to be a member of the management committee (which by the way, women only make up about 15% of nationwide, on average) some day. However, I never saw myself as one of my firms top 10 rainmakers. I just don't know that this is within reach. Therefore, I am not surprised that others like me never get there.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the importance of making it rain and plan to build the skill set in order to make enough rain to reach my goals, and then some.

Will flextime get you laid off?

Submitted by Peg

There was a provocative article on Forbes.com recently, titled "Will Flextime Set You Up to Be Laid Off?" In it, the author, Tara Weiss, discusses anecdotal evidence that working a flex schedule may, in fact, put you at the top of the layoff list. She also talks to Deborah Epstein Henry, of Flex-time Lawyers, LLC (a friend of Ms. JD) and one of the founders of Balanomics -- an initiative that Ms. JD signed up to support early on.

At the end of the article, Weiss suggests ways to avoid a layoff being the unintended consequence of flextime -- all of which touch on ways to be in the office when it is most important and staying connected to co-workers and supervisors. The advice also includes this seemingly counter-productive suggestion: "Most important, be flexible. If your boss needs you in the office, be there."

I spend a lot of time thinking about flextime and its connection to and/or solution to that illusive work/life balance issue that seems to be the 1000 ft concrete wall standing between many women lawyers and professional success.

When one woman leaves

Submitted by Peg

I've got to vent a little...A few weeks ago a female senior associate left my firm to go work for a judge. She is one of the few associates that has left voluntarily since I've been here. She is amazing - mother of 2, great attorney, part-time but cleary on track for partnership. (The head of litigation in our office is reported to have said that she was the first part-time lawyer that he would consider making a partner.) She was involved in the policies of the firm (as much as an associate can be) -- on the associate committee, founder of a woman's affinity group. She was ultra-professional but also super nice. Let's face it, she was talented. Also, truth be told she was our next best hope for a female partner in this office -- something we all had our fingers crossed would happen in the next 2 or 3 years. When she left, word has it that some very influential partners pratically begged her to stay.

I wanted to say to her "Don't leave us, we need you to stay, to make partner, to change things around here so that it is better for women." I wanted to say to her that she was taking the easy road but that she was too good to leave. However, at her farewell, all I could say was "good luck" and "I'm happy for you" even though I was sad for the rest of us and sad for the firm and sad for the plight of women in law firms everywhere.

Supply and Demand

Submitted by Peg

I spend a fair amount of time considering why it is that women are so under represented in the partnerships of large law firms. I do this as a semi-professional endeavor but also due to my own self-interest as a junior associate who (1) intends to make partner in a few years and some day be involved in the management of my current firm and (2) wonders if there is something that I am not anticipating that will drive me from practice as has happened to so many partnership tracked women ahead of me.

One of the key pieces of this equation is child bearing/rearing -- I know this is no great revelation as anyone with a brain and eyes can see that more women leave practice due to child-raising conflicts than men. However, I have also been a believer that programs for re-entry into the profession after having taken some time to have and raise kids is a critical part of solution to keeping women in the profession.

Networking is hard

Submitted by Peg

Okay, so I'm the lawyer who has been writing the seven part series titled "A Junior Associate's Networking Plan". I know, I know, I owe Ms. JD a couple of installments of that series, which I promise to get to soon. Anyway, I recently found myself on the receiving end of a friend's networking efforts and it was hard for me. Therefore, I thought I would write here to tell you about how hard it was for me but also share how I talked myself into doing that which I knew I should.

Background: My good friend, who is an attorney in my town, has decided to run for the board of directors of our local women's bar association. This is something that I have strongly encouraged her to do and totally support. In fact, it falls under items II and IV of my so-called "Plan". I am also involved in the same bar association and regularly attend events and chair one of the association's committees. Through this, I have formed relationships (both working and personal) with a number of the group's members.

Part IV in Series: A Junior Associate's Networking Plan

Submitted by Peg

Today's post in the series I've named "A Junior Associate's Networking Plan" is Community Involvement. See here for the start of this series.

Book Review: Lipstick Jungle

Submitted by Peg

As I've posted about before, I am a fan of the NBC series "Lipstick Jungle". Sadly, rumor has it that the series has been cancelled and this Friday's "Season Finale" is actually the end of the show forever. Looks like my lot in life is to have the network dramas that I really like get cancelled.

For Christmas, I asked for and recieved the book by Candace Bushnell that inspired the series. Even though I pretty much read for a living, I still enjoy a good fiction novel every once in a while but it needs to be something good and something that keeps my attention so that I read it through to the end. Lipstick Jungle was just that -- I thoroughly enjoyed it and would recommend it to professional women everywhere.

Part V in Series: A Junior Associate's Networking Plan

Submitted by Peg

Part V in my 7-part series is Pro Bono work.

I, like most junior associates, took on a pro bono client early in my law-firm career. I took my first pro bono client/project based on typical factors: 1- a partner asked me to do it and 2- well, there is no second reason.

Now, with a little bit of experience and having had the chance to work on a number of pro bono matters, I realize the networking and business development opportunity presented by carefully-chosen pro bono work. At the outset I want to clarify that pro bono work is our professional responsibilty. We do it to give access to the justice system to those that can't afford it otherwise. However, for corporate lawyers particularly, there is a great side benefit of working for non-profit organizations and that benefit is networking.

A false dicotomy: Husband-shopping vs. Serious Professional

Submitted by Peg

There is a post from last week on a blog called "Hiring Partner's Office" that seemingly gives sage advice about building your law firm reputation. The hypothetical is about two women associates. One is "pleasant, cheerful" and career focused. The other does "seemingly solid work" but isn't social. The post is decent until the point where the author accuses the second (and more inferior) associate of possibly working at the firm just to land a "rich hubby".!!! What!!! This point is questioned by a couple of the commentors and earned the post a link on corporette.com.

This scenario makes me very angry. Obviously the husband-shopping comment by the poster was not necessary. But, it is a symptom and not the problem. It is a symptom of a profession that questions the motives of women who work within it. It is a symptom of a society that still wonders why women would pursue high-powered careers. It is also a symptom of a culture that allows this poster (aka "Hiring Partner") to let this thought role of his/her tongue when writing a post designed to be helpful and not hurtful. I wonder what this person is thinking that doesn't get through the filter??